Who was a better leader, Khrushchev or Stalin?

Question

Who was a better leader, Khrushchev or Stalin?

Answer 1

that is true and plus he wanted to bring down the ussr so khrushchev

Answer 2

Khrushchev wasn't a particularly good leader--he was erratic, and tended to yank the country back and forth (e.g., between being aggressive and conciliatory toward the West).  OTOH, Stalin was a failed leader.  From what I've read about the Purges, they weren't some ruthlessly brilliant plot he hatched and executed, but something that started in society and snowballed.  He could have stopped it with a word, but was afraid to ask because his paranoia and somewhat limited intellect prevented him acting.  Overall, I'd have to give the title to Khrushchev, if for no other reason than that he turned the country in a far more humane direction.

Answer 3

Khrushchev.  

Stalin was a leader who butchered thousands of people. Nitika at least did not use violence against his people.

Answer 4

It all depends on your definition of a good leader.

If you think that throwing massive amounts of a countries resources at problems without researching whether or not it'll work is good - then Khrushchev is a winner.

If you think that creating a paranoid, unimaginative, non-risk taking population is good, then Stalin's the one.

Personally I think Stalin was a more capable leader, he was intelligent, driven and focused - the right man for industrialisation and to lead the country during WWII.  But I think Khrushchev was a better leader - he was not that intelligent, he could be a crude man, he was prone to hare-brained schemes without consulting his advisers (cuba, virgin-lands) but he did rein in the terror, and he tried to make socialism humane - unfortunately this wasn't what the rest of the Politburo wanted.

See: Khrushchev by William Taubman, Stalin. A Biography by Robert Service and Unpersoned: The fall of Nikita Sergeyevitch Khrushchev by Martin Page and david Burg.

Answer 5

Khrushchev, people tended not to die under him.